It is true that most of us were at camp over the long weekend. Sorry you misunderstood the silence. I was going to post something that warned of my absence, but the Internet and/or my latest version of Internet Explorer were acting up in the last day before I left.
First of all, Simon told me that the Chinese name of the form was yi bai ling ba bu, or 108 steps. These are the same characters as suparinpei with the addition of the final "steps" character.
I've heard all kinds of explanations for the significance of the number. The most reasonable I have heard is that there are 108 steps to enlightenment in the Buddhist religion, and so the name was popular as a final statement in a martial arts system. The other kata names with numbers (seisan, seiryu, sanseiryu, etc) have similar connections to the religion and are similarly used as a common name for forms. Thus, there are really no similarities between the Uechi and Goju sanseiryu (I have done both), or the Goju suparinpei and this form I am practicing.
Simon was aware of the history and allegations of the fourth (lost) kata of the system. He stumbled on these folks and the form while in China, but learned it as a Goju practitioner with knowledge that the Uechi folk might be interested in the historical connection. He came to Boston and George Mattson filmed him doing the form (with lots of hesitations and variations) from several directions. I originally learned a version of the form off this recording. Subsequently Simon did more study of the form in China, and then I met him at a camp about 5 years ago. He cleaned up a lot of my misunderstandings of the form caused by learning it via a poor-quality recording, and made further corrections based on his additional studies. I believe I do the form pretty close to the way Simon does it now, with the caveat that my background is a bit different and so my emphasis will naturally differ. Last time I saw him, he made two corrections in a form that takes 3 minutes to do at full speed.
There are differences between the way Simon and I do the form. Being both a Uechi and Goju practitioner, I can see where his Goju background may have crept in and expressed itself in the way he performs the kata. I naturally have my own way of viewing the world, and obviously Evan is in another dimension. I have attempted to ascribe specific postures to what is being done (call the stances by stance names), whereas Simon just does things and has you copy them. My purpose, of course, was to create a language of communication so the form could be transcribed to paper as well as be filmed. Obviously stylistic variance will creep in during the translation process. In one e-mail exchange I had with Simon, he was a bit upset because someone told him (obviously a Fuzhou suparinpei authority
) that I was "Uechifying" the form. But then Simon himself told me that all the students of "the old man" were doing the form different, and "the old man" didn't seem to care. Furthermore, he noted that significant changes had happened between his two visits. At first Simon thought that maybe they were collectively teasing him, or playing "hide the ball" with the form. And yes...one of the kyusho people at camp gave me this story about how old masters would never teach you THE form that had all the deadly moves in them and were generations old, yada, yada, yada. But Simon came to a very different understanding. Apparently their (the Fuzhou) idea of a form is quite different from our own. The Fuzhou folk practice their forms like jazz music, whereas the Okinawans tend to think of their own (or whatever snapshot in time they got when studying in China) as pieces of classical music. So change and personal expression was EXACTLY the point. I pointed that out to Simon in my mail exchange with him. Go look at George's first filming of Simon doing the form. I guarantee you the way he does it now is dramatically different (in the what as well as the how). I know it is because I have seen him at several points in time, and he readily admits that the Chinese change it all the bloody time. Anyhow...Simon just wanted me to stay in touch. And whenever I can, I readily pay my respects to him for starting me on the journey of this form.I see this in one of Ron's posts. <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote
Actually my best sources disagree somewhat on this. Tomoyose Ryuko will tell you from now until the day he dies that there are only three forms in the Uechi system. And by the strict definition of Uechi ryu...he has a point. However many other written sources (refer to Mattson's Uechiryu Karatedo and Dollar's Secrets of Uechi Ryu Karate) refer to a suparinpei form that Kanbun at least saw if not practiced. I was having a forum discussion about this with Gordi Breyette, and he was adamant about the fact that there was no fourth form. Well he is now studying with Toyama Seiko, the only living student of Uechi Kanbun. Gordi went to him to prove his point....only to be told that there was indeed a suparinpei and Kanbun had actually worked with it (to some degree). As I recall, Toyama told Gordi that Kanbun just chose not to teach it. Kanbun likely gave a different reason each time someone asked. If you've ever tried to learn the form (and if they are indeed the same), you'd probably see why Kanbun gave up on it. It's extremely long, and difficult to do. It is not for everyone, and certainly not necessary to learn to be a good fighter.It is said Kanbun Sensei did know a fourth kata but it was not Suparempei.
Is this THE lost form? See my discussion above about how the Fuzhou folks view forms. Whether it is or not, the point is moot. You will probably never see exactly what Kanbun saw. All I can tell you is that this form and Uechi ryu have common origins, and I can point out many of the similarities and fascinating contrasts.
Enough for now...
- Bill
[This message has been edited by Bill Glasheen (edited August 15, 2000).]
Haisai (Okinawan for "Hello"),
